>>>2425988
>Incorrect decoding.
anons got this wrong so far
>Not the person.
don't focus on Kate or the OK guy
>Think connection.
back up the telephoto lens and see the big picture, the connection Q's trying to show us
>Threat 1
Find the connection between a past newspaper article, which is Threat #1. . .
>Threat 2
. . . and a future rally → perhaps the "future" rally was last night in PA, perhaps it has yet to take place (?)
>1 = past (newspaper)
roger that.
>2 = future (rally)
roger that.
>1=2
The past newspaper threat = the future rally threat; they are perfectly connected.
>Post noted (VIP access).
Q's prior post noted "VIP access" → so, someone who was/who did receive VIP access (could that be the Press? or are we talking @ a non-Press person who was invited to an area reserved for "VIPs" (if there even is such an area at the rallies)
>Message sent.
Regardless of whether we figure it out, Q has let (((them))) know that Q team knows. But why tip them off like this, why not nab the f'er and prosecute? Maybe the threat was not to injure POTUS, but rather, to [kill] the Q movement or malign Trump supporters?
>We know.
Why let (((them))) know we know what they're up to? Why????
>Q